{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/18/2015 6:29:41 AM
4
cod bo3, still using red dots when the game is set in 2065?!
yeah nothing original, making a futuristic game without good technology for the guns! same old ideas...
English
-
? Not to play devil's advocate but how much more futuristic can they get? Realistically, holograms are too expensive (presumably) when red dots do the same thing. Also, robots can make machine guns come out of their arms. I'd say that's pretty advanced.
-
if so why not implicit it then (holograms) and machine guns out of arms is fine but there is some natural based weaponry still there. COD has not made there own unique guns like other developers have made for there franchise that made them different
-
CoD is meant to be semi-realistic. (Believe it or not) Pulling random guns out of their ass and naming it isn't the way to go about things. They take existing weapons, build upon them as off they were years in the future where they were better, and give names as suited.
-
you explained it in a nutshell, but that's what I don't like about it lol I believe they have potential but it's like afraid to cross that line lol
